Category: Uncategorized

Leading by Example? Leadership, Culture, and Strengths-Based Social Work

Leadership is a crucial component of meaningful change, shaping vision, influencing values, and motivating others to act. It plays a central role in cultivating organizational cultures that welcome innovation and support new approaches to practice. This article explores the connections between leadership, culture, and change in the context of a strengths-based transformation initiative within adult social work services. Drawing on a theory-of-change methodology, the study used multiple qualitative methods over twenty-four months to examine the expectations of those responsible for leading change and the experiences of those implementing it. Participants included senior leaders, social workers, operational managers, professionals from health and the voluntary sector, and community representatives. The programme’s underlying assumptions suggested that distributing leadership both within and beyond social work organizations would foster innovation in practice. The findings indicate that, in practice, senior leaders remained central to driving change, and that the involvement of communities was more limited than intended. Although the need for culture change was widely acknowledged, the practical knowledge required to initiate and sustain it within local contexts was often underdeveloped. Strengthening understanding of distributed leadership and cultural transformation, alongside building infrastructures that support co-production and community-led contributions, will enhance the effectiveness of social work transformation efforts.

Introduction

Leadership in social work is widely recognized as a key factor in shaping environments in which practitioners can thrive, high-quality practice can flourish, and collaborative work with individuals and communities can deepen. Leadership is also commonly discussed in relation to initiating and embedding change. Leaders articulate a compelling need for transformation, unite people behind shared goals, and encourage voluntary commitment to new ways of working. Social work scholarship emphasizes that leadership inherently involves enabling positive change, whether by addressing injustice, improving experiences of individuals and families, or enhancing social systems. A range of leadership models, including transformational, distributed, and strengths-based leadership, are seen as particularly relevant to social work because they connect with the profession’s value base and its emphasis on collaboration, empowerment, and shared influence. Leadership is not confined to formal management, as social workers in direct practice often serve as agents of change by influencing colleagues and systems through their professional credibility and skills.

Organizational change in social work is complex. While planned reform and emergent pressures both shape practice, many variables influence how change unfolds. Contextual factors such as financial constraints, tensions between professional and managerial priorities, scrutiny, and the emotional demands of the role often affect practitioners’ capacity to engage with change. Organizational culture, with its multiple layers and subcultures, strongly influences whether new approaches become embedded or resisted. Despite its importance, culture can be difficult to define and even harder to reshape. Leadership has been identified as a key factor in aligning vision and practice and distributing agency across systems in ways that support cultural readiness for change.

Although leadership and culture are frequently highlighted as central to social work transformation, relatively little research has explored their role in depth. This article addresses that gap by examining how local areas engaged with these dimensions during the implementation of a strengths-based transformation programme in adult social care. Rather than evaluating the programme’s outcomes, this article focuses specifically on how leadership and culture were understood, enacted, and experienced during the change process.

Assumptions about leadership, culture, and change

Across participants, leadership was seen as essential to the programme’s success. Senior leaders who publicly aligned their values with the ethos of the programme and demonstrated them in practice were viewed as crucial enablers. Participants expected leadership to shift from traditional top-down approaches to more relational styles that trust practitioners, encourage creativity, and distribute authority. This required leaders to reflect critically on past behaviours and organizational norms, particularly those that constrained professional autonomy. Leadership development opportunities and change champion roles were commonly viewed as tools for fostering this shift.

Culture change was also seen as necessary, yet many participants struggled to clearly articulate what aspects of culture needed to change or how this would be achieved. Most framed the desired shift as a movement away from centralized control toward professional autonomy, mirroring the broader distinction between deficit-based and strengths-based practice models.

The continuing influence of individual leaders

Despite aspirations for distributed leadership, the programme’s success was often attributed to individual senior leaders whose personal commitment, credibility, and authenticity inspired others. Such leaders were described as passionate, pragmatic, and influential, creating momentum and a shared sense of purpose. Their involvement generated trust and motivated engagement across teams. However, reliance on individual leaders created vulnerability, as turnover in senior roles sometimes halted or reversed progress. This risk extended to practice innovations, which could lose momentum without shared ownership across teams.

Vertical distribution of leadership

The programme’s theory of change envisioned leadership emerging at all organizational levels. Participants offered examples of distributed leadership, such as frontline teams shaping new practices or community access initiatives responding flexibly to local needs. Healthcare staff, social workers, and other professionals were sometimes encouraged to contribute to innovation groups. However, hierarchical structures, accountability demands, and resource pressures often limited the extent of meaningful distribution. Middle managers played a pivotal role, serving at times as facilitators of innovation and at other times as barriers influenced by competing priorities and pressure.

Horizontal distribution across organizations and communities

Efforts to extend leadership across sector boundaries revealed ongoing challenges. Collaboration between social care and health was hindered by differing cultures, disputes over resources, and historical tensions. Although joint training improved relationships, deep integration remained limited. Partnerships with the voluntary and community sector were valued for their knowledge of local assets, but their leadership potential was constrained by funding dependencies and contractual arrangements that reinforced hierarchical relationships. Co-production with people with lived experience was similarly limited, often mediated through existing advisory groups rather than enabling direct leadership. Nonetheless, there were emerging examples of initiatives that began to integrate lived experience into transformation processes more meaningfully.

Discussion

Strengths-based practice remains deeply aligned with core social work values such as equality, inclusion, and community orientation. Yet embedding such practice within existing systems requires cultural change and leadership that reinforces these values. The study highlights the ongoing difficulty of articulating and operationalizing culture change, which demands long-term, coordinated effort rather than generalized aspirations. Leadership, while better understood conceptually, remained heavily anchored in hierarchical expectations, with senior leaders continuing to serve as the main drivers of change. This reliance, although often constructive, complicated efforts to build truly distributed leadership systems.

The limited involvement of people with lived experience and community organizations suggests that social work systems continue to face barriers in shifting power beyond organizational boundaries. Factors contributing to this include lack of skills in community development, reduced emphasis on such approaches in professional education, and structural constraints shaped by commissioning practices. Nonetheless, the profession’s values and historical commitment to social justice position it to lead by example in advancing co-production and inclusive leadership.

Conclusion

This study underscores the importance and complexity of leadership in social work transformation. While distributed leadership is widely endorsed in principle, in practice most change remained dependent on senior leaders, highlighting the need for thoughtful succession planning and stronger cultural embedding of new approaches. Achieving distribution of leadership vertically and horizontally requires deliberate, realistic strategies and long-term commitment.

The findings point to several practical implications, including the need for deeper understanding of cultural transformation, stronger infrastructure for co-production, renewed focus on community development skills, and leadership development that includes practitioners, people with lived experience, and partners from health and the voluntary sector. Social work, grounded in values of inclusion and shared power, is well placed to advance these approaches and model transformative leadership.

Source

PACE: A Trauma-Informed Approach to Supporting Children and Young People

Introduction to PACE

PACE is a therapeutic approach developed by Dr. Dan Hughes more than two decades ago, designed to help adults build safe, meaningful, and trusting relationships with children and young people who have experienced trauma. Rooted in attachment-focused family therapy, PACE encourages adults to think, feel, communicate, and behave in ways that help children feel secure. It is not a rigid, step-by-step procedure, but rather a flexible mindset that integrates four essential qualities: Playfulness, Acceptance, Curiosity, and Empathy.

Children who have lived through traumatic experiences often struggle with trust, connection, and emotional regulation. Their interactions with adults may be shaped by fear, defensiveness, or shame, making it difficult to form stable attachments. PACE aims to create an environment where these children feel safe enough to explore emotions, express themselves, and build resilience. By adopting PACE, adults can slow down their own responses, regulate their emotions, and remain engaged even during challenging moments. This emotional regulation is essential: when adults stay calm and supportive, children are more likely to mirror that stability, gradually learning to manage their own intense emotions.

Ultimately, PACE offers both children and adults a pathway toward understanding, connection, and healing. Instead of focusing primarily on correcting behaviours, it emphasises relationship-building and emotional safety. In this way, it equips caregivers, teachers, and social workers with strategies to guide children through difficult emotions and behaviours, without compromising their sense of self-worth.

Playfulness

Playfulness is the first element of PACE and serves as an important bridge to closeness without fear. Many children affected by trauma may withdraw from joyful experiences, having lost hope in the possibility of fun or shared enjoyment. For some, affection feels threatening, and hugs or overt displays of love may be rejected. A playful stance provides a gentler alternative, allowing warmth and closeness without overwhelming the child.

Playfulness reassures children that conflicts or separations in a relationship are temporary and not damaging to the connection. In tense situations, a light tone of voice, animated facial expressions, or humour can defuse defensiveness and create opportunities for reconnection. This is not about minimising serious misbehaviour but about keeping minor incidents in perspective. For instance, when a child resists transitioning between activities, introducing a playful game or role-play can reduce resistance and maintain cooperation.

Practical strategies for playfulness include storytelling tones rather than lecturing, softening facial expressions, lowering body posture to avoid intimidating presence, or transforming routine tasks into small games. These subtle adjustments communicate warmth and safety while maintaining the adult’s authority.

Importantly, playfulness is not about distracting from difficulties or denying a child’s struggles. Instead, it signals to the child that relationships can contain joy, even in the presence of challenges. For children who expect rejection or punishment, playfulness can be a powerful reassurance that their presence is valued. Over time, playful interactions rebuild a child’s belief in positive connection and create space for emotional growth.

Acceptance

Acceptance in PACE communicates to a child that their inner world—thoughts, feelings, and intentions—is safe from judgment. For many children, especially those shaped by trauma, the fear of being criticised or rejected for their feelings can prevent honest expression. Acceptance means separating the child’s identity and intentions from their behaviours. Adults can challenge unsafe behaviours while still affirming the child’s worth and humanity.

For example, when a child declares, “You hate me,” a typical adult instinct may be to deny or correct the statement. However, PACE encourages an accepting response such as, “I’m sorry it feels that way to you. That must be really painful.” This communicates understanding without dismissal, showing the child that their perspective matters, even if it is painful or inaccurate.

Through acceptance, children learn that conflict does not equal rejection. They discover that behaviours can be addressed and limited without threatening their relationship or self-worth. Adults may say, “I’m disappointed by what you did, but I know you were upset. It doesn’t change how much I care about you.” Such statements reinforce the difference between disapproving of behaviour and rejecting the child as a person.

This practice strengthens children’s confidence in relationships, making them more willing to share vulnerabilities. Acceptance fosters resilience by teaching children that they can be loved despite their mistakes, and that their feelings—whether anger, fear, or sadness—are valid and worthy of attention.

Examples or how to express acceptance:

“I can see how you feel this is unfair. You wanted to play longer”
“You probably think that I don’t care about what you want”
“You were letting me know that you were really scared when you ran
away from me”
“I can hear you saying that you hate me and you’re feeling really cross.
I’ll still be here for you after you calm down”.
“I’m disappointed by what you did, but I know you were really upset. It
doesn’t change how much I care about you”.

Curiosity

Curiosity is the element of PACE that invites children to explore and reflect on the reasons behind their behaviours. Many children, especially those living with trauma, may recognise that their actions are inappropriate but lack the words or awareness to explain why. Instead of asking “Why did you do that?” in a demanding or accusatory way, curiosity involves gentle wondering, aimed at understanding rather than interrogating.

For instance, rather than scolding a child for breaking a toy, an adult might say, “I’m wondering if you broke the toy because you were feeling angry.” Such open-ended reflections give children the opportunity to recognise and articulate their emotions without fear of judgment. The tone is vital: curiosity must be communicated lightly, with compassion rather than frustration.

Curiosity helps children distinguish between their behaviours and their identities. When adults show genuine interest in the underlying feelings—such as sadness, fear, or confusion—children begin to understand that their behaviours are expressions of unmet needs rather than evidence of being “bad.” This reduces shame and defensiveness, replacing them with healthier emotions such as guilt, which can motivate positive change.

Examples of curiosity include phrases like, “I wonder if…,” “Could it be…?,” or “Tell me if I’m getting this wrong.” These sentence starters signal openness and a desire to understand, not to correct. Over time, curiosity builds children’s capacity for self-reflection and strengthens trust in their caregivers.

Examples of curiosity:

“I’m wondering if you broke the toy because you were feeling angry.”
“I’m thinking you’re a little nervous about going back to school today,
and that’s why you don’t want to get ready this morning”.
“I’ve noticed that you’ve been using a really loud voice, and if you’re
trying to tell me that you’re angry with me.”
“I’m a little confused. Usually you love going for a walk, but today you
don’t want to go. I’m wondering what’s different about today”.
“When she couldn’t play with you today, I’m wondering if you thought
that meant she doesn’t like you.”

Empathy

Empathy is the heart of PACE, ensuring children feel that they do not face struggles alone. Empathy involves actively recognising and validating a child’s distress, demonstrating compassion and solidarity. For traumatised children, empathy communicates that their emotions are not too overwhelming or burdensome for the adult to handle.

Showing empathy requires both words and actions. Adults might say, “That must have been so painful,” or “You are really upset right now, and that’s so hard.” Such statements acknowledge the child’s feelings without minimising them. Non-verbal cues, such as calm body language, gentle tone, and attentive presence, reinforce the message.

Importantly, empathy is not about pity or indulgence. It is about recognising that behaviours often stem from deeper struggles and showing willingness to share in those struggles. By doing so, adults demonstrate resilience and commitment, reassuring the child that the relationship remains intact even during difficult moments.

For example, when a child lashes out after feeling excluded, empathy might sound like: “It hurt so much when she didn’t ask you to play. That must have felt confusing.” This helps the child name their emotions and feel understood. Over time, empathy helps children build trust in relationships, knowing that their vulnerabilities will be met with care rather than criticism.

Examples of empathy:
“You are SO upset about this right now. That must be really hard!”
“It hurt so much when she didn’t ask you to play. You were probably
thinking ‘Why did she do that?’ It was a real shock for you.”
“You wanted to have another turn so badly. You were so excited about it
and it’s so unfair that we ran out of time”.
“It seems to you like he hates you. That must be really hard. I know you
like him a lot, so this is pretty confusing”.
“I know it’s hard for you to hear what I’m saying.”
“Me saying ‘No’ has made you angry with me. I get why you don’t want
to talk to me right now”

PACE in Practice

While PACE is simple in principle, applying it consistently in real-life situations can be challenging. Adults often feel the urge to correct or discipline, especially when confronted with disrespect or aggression. Yet practice shows that PACE-oriented responses defuse conflict and build stronger relationships.

Take, for instance, Emily, who becomes angry when denied a turn on the swings, yelling “I hate you!” A typical response might involve correcting her rudeness. A PACE-ful approach, however, acknowledges her anger with playfulness and empathy: “Wow, you’re really angry! It feels rubbish when you can’t do what you want.” Such responses validate her feelings while keeping the relationship intact.

Similarly, when Tom swears at his dad after school, a typical response might be punishment. But with PACE, his dad could say, “I can see you’re really angry. I’m wondering if something happened at school.” This curiosity and empathy create space for Tom to share his feelings rather than escalating conflict.

These examples illustrate how PACE transforms discipline into connection. Instead of viewing behaviours as personal attacks or defiance, adults see them as expressions of inner struggles. By responding with playfulness, acceptance, curiosity, and empathy, adults guide children toward emotional regulation, resilience, and trust.

Example:
Emily asks Mum if she can play on the swings. Mum says she can’t as they need to be home soon. Emily gets very upset and angry and starts yelling “that’s so unfair, I hate you. You’re horrible!!!!”
Typical response:
“Emily, don’t be so rude!”
“Life’s unfair!”
“I am not horrible and you don’t hate me.”
PACE-ful response:
“OH WOW [in an animated voice], you’re feeling REALLY ANGRY [with a concerned expression]….you think I’m being mean by not letting you go on the swings when you really want to go…I’m saying no and you really want to go and that feels rubbish…it’s so frustrating when
someone says we can’t do something that we want to do!”
“I’m really sorry you feel that I hate you Emily that must feel awful – no wonder you’re so angry and upset if you think I hate you! I’d want to scream and shout too…”
“It’s rubbish that we can’t do the things we enjoy right now…I’m missing the swings too…maybe we could all have a think about what other games we could on our way home…”

The 4 R’s of Responding with PACE

To support practical application, PACE can be aligned with the “4 R’s of Responding”: Regulate, Relate, Reason, and Repair. These steps provide a framework for managing challenging behaviours while maintaining emotional safety.

Regulate involves calming both the child and the adult. Adults must notice their own emotional state, ensuring they remain calm, compassionate, and engaged. They also help the child regulate by addressing immediate safety concerns and using soothing, light-hearted approaches.

Relate comes next, where adults seek to understand the meaning behind the child’s behaviour. Using curiosity and empathy, they explore the child’s motives, fears, or frustrations, showing genuine interest in their experience.

Reason follows, when the adult and child can discuss the behaviour rationally. Logical consequences may be introduced here, but always in a way that separates the behaviour from the child’s worth.

Repair is the final step, ensuring the relationship remains strong. This might include offering a hug, doing something enjoyable together, or using words and actions to affirm ongoing love and connection.

For example, if a child breaks a jar in a supermarket, a PACE-ful process would involve regulating emotions first, then relating by wondering what feelings triggered the act. Once calm, the child can reason about consequences, such as writing a letter of apology. Finally, repairing the relationship reassures the child that the incident does not damage their bond with the adult.

This structured yet compassionate approach ensures that discipline is balanced with emotional safety, turning difficult incidents into opportunities for growth.

Conclusion

PACE offers a trauma-informed, attachment-based framework for supporting children and young people. By integrating Playfulness, Acceptance, Curiosity, and Empathy into everyday interactions, adults can build stronger, safer, and more trusting relationships. The approach recognises that behind every challenging behaviour is an unmet need, an unspoken emotion, or a legacy of trauma. Instead of focusing narrowly on behaviour management, PACE invites adults to engage with the whole child, affirming their worth and supporting their healing journey.

Through consistent practice, PACE not only helps children regulate emotions but also strengthens the resilience of caregivers, teachers, and social workers. The “4 R’s of Responding” provide a practical framework for applying these principles, ensuring that discipline and connection go hand in hand. Ultimately, PACE reminds us that children are not problems to be fixed but individuals to be understood, supported, and valued.

Source

Trauma informed Social Work Practice

Trauma-informed social work practice is an approach to social work that takes into account the impact of trauma on the lives of individuals, families, and communities. This approach recognizes that trauma can have long-term effects on a person’s mental health, physical health, and well-being, and that individuals who have experienced trauma require specialized care and support.

The goal of trauma-informed social work practice is to create a safe and supportive environment for individuals who have experienced trauma. This approach emphasizes the importance of building trust and collaboration with clients, as well as empowering clients to make decisions about their own care. Trauma-informed social work practice also recognizes the role that societal and institutional trauma can play in the lives of individuals, and seeks to create change at a systemic level.

One of the key principles of trauma-informed social work practice is understanding the prevalence of trauma. Research has shown that a significant percentage of the population has experienced some form of trauma in their lives. This trauma can range from individual experiences, such as physical or sexual abuse, to collective experiences, such as discrimination or systemic oppression. Understanding the prevalence of trauma is essential in creating an environment that is sensitive to the needs of individuals who have experienced trauma.

Another principle of trauma-informed social work practice is the importance of safety. Trauma can create feelings of fear, anxiety, and vulnerability, which can make it difficult for individuals to engage in social work services. Trauma-informed social work practice emphasizes the importance of creating a safe environment for clients, both physically and emotionally. This may involve providing privacy and confidentiality, ensuring that clients have control over their own care, and creating a space that is calm and welcoming.

Trauma-informed social work practice also emphasizes the importance of empowerment. Clients who have experienced trauma often feel disempowered and may have difficulty trusting others. Trauma-informed social work practice seeks to empower clients by providing them with information, support, and tools to help them make decisions about their own care. This may involve working collaboratively with clients, recognizing their strengths and resources, and supporting them in setting goals that are meaningful to them.

Cultural humility is also a key aspect of trauma-informed social work practice. Social workers must recognize the ways in which cultural differences can impact the experience of trauma, as well as the ways in which cultural beliefs and practices can be a source of strength and resilience. Cultural humility involves recognizing one’s own cultural biases and limitations, and working to create a culturally responsive and inclusive environment for clients.

Finally, trauma-informed social work practice recognizes the importance of collaboration and partnership. Addressing the impact of trauma requires a multidisciplinary approach, and social workers must work collaboratively with other professionals, such as mental health providers, medical professionals, and educators. Trauma-informed social work practice also recognizes the importance of community partnerships, and seeks to create partnerships with community organizations and leaders to create a more supportive and responsive environment for individuals who have experienced trauma.

In conclusion, trauma-informed social work practice is an approach to social work that recognizes the impact of trauma on the lives of individuals, families, and communities. It emphasizes the importance of understanding the prevalence of trauma, creating a safe and empowering environment for clients, practicing cultural humility, and collaborating with other professionals and community partners. By adopting a trauma-informed approach, social workers can provide more effective care and support to individuals who have experienced trauma, and contribute to creating a more just and equitable society.

Neuroplasticity, emotional affect and regulation

Neuroplasticity

Neuroplasticity refers to the brain’s ability to reorganize itself by forming new neural connections throughout life. This process is crucial for learning, memory, and recovery from brain injuries. Andrew Huberman emphasizes that neuroplasticity enables the brain to adapt to experiences, which is foundational for skill acquisition and rehabilitation.

Key processes involved in neuroplasticity include:

  • Long-term potentiation (LTP) and long-term depression (LTD): These are mechanisms that strengthen or weaken synapses based on activity levels. LTP increases the efficiency of synaptic transmission, while LTD decreases synaptic strength.
  • Experience-dependent plasticity: Changes in the brain due to experiences, such as learning a musical instrument or mastering a new language.
  • Experience-expectant plasticity: Refers to the brain’s ability to adapt based on expected sensory experiences, which is especially critical during developmental stages.

Emotional Affect

Emotional affect pertains to the experience and expression of emotions. It plays a pivotal role in shaping our responses to various stimuli, influencing our motivation, behavior, and overall mental health. Emotional regulation, or how we manage our emotions, is integral to maintaining emotional balance and well-being.

Key points regarding emotional affect include:

  • Impact of emotions on behavior: Emotions can significantly influence decision-making and interpersonal relationships. High emotional states may impair rational thought, while effectively regulated emotions can enhance performance and social interactions.
  • The role of neuroplasticity in emotional regulation: Learning to regulate emotions can lead to lasting changes in brain structure and function, enhancing an individual’s ability to cope with stress and adversity.
  • discusses how mindfulness and cognitive behavioral strategies can trigger neuroplastic changes that reinforce positive emotional responses.

Emotional Regulation

Emotional regulation involves strategies to influence which emotions we have, when we have them, and how we experience and express them. Effective emotional regulation is linked to better mental health outcomes and the ability to handle stress.

Techniques for emotional regulation include:

  • Cognitive reappraisal: Changing the way we think about a situation to alter its emotional impact. This technique promotes emotional resilience by fostering a positive outlook.
  • Mindfulness practices: Engaging in mindfulness and meditation can enhance awareness of emotional states, promote acceptance, and reduce automatic responses to emotional stimuli.
  • Physical activities: Exercise can serve as a powerful tool for emotional regulation, improving mood and reducing stress by releasing endorphins and other beneficial neurochemicals.

The importance of social connections and support systems in emotional regulation. Relationships provide a buffer against stress and contribute to emotional resilience.

Integration of Concepts

Understanding how neuroplasticity interacts with emotional affect and regulation is crucial for personal development and psychological well-being. Research shows that:

  • Engaging in activities that promote learning and emotional regulation can lead to structural brain changes that enhance resilience.
  • Chronic stress can negatively affect neuroplasticity, leading to issues like anxiety and depression, while positive experiences can promote adaptive changes in the brain.

Working with Involuntary Clients in Social Work: Theory, Practice and Ethical Considerations

Introduction

Social work is often associated with helping individuals and families who seek help and support voluntarily, motivated by their own recognition of problems and desire for change. However, a significant proportion of social work practice involves involuntary clients, individuals whose engagement with social workers is mandated or influenced by legal, institutional, or external pressures (Wilkinson, Smith & Gallaher, 2010; Smith, 2020). These clients include families involved in child protection, offenders in the criminal justice system(CJS), people with mental health conditions under compulsory treatment, or young people who are referred due to truancy or behavioural issues.

Working with involuntary clients presents a unique set of challenges for practitioners. They may resist intervention, lack trust in professionals, or deny that any problem exists. The power imbalance between worker and client is often sharper than in voluntary relationships, as the worker may hold statutory authority and the ability to enforce compliance. As a result, social workers must balance legal responsibilities with ethical principles of respect, empathy, and empowerment.

Defining Involuntary Clients

The term “involuntary client” describes individuals who engage with social workers under compulsion or pressure, rather than through free choice. Wilkinson, Smith and Gallaher (2010) distinguish between:

  • Mandated clients: those compelled to work with practitioners due to legal mandates, such as offenders on probation or families in child protection investigations.
  • Non-voluntary clients: those who engage due to external pressure from institutions, family, or circumstances, for example, students referred for persistent non-attendance at school.

Trotter, Rooney and Rooney (2020) argue that these categories exist along a continuum between voluntary and involuntary engagement. While some clients may be entirely mandated, others may initially resist but later engage willingly once trust is established. Recognising this spectrum is essential for practitioners, as it underlines the potential for movement from resistance to collaboration.

Challenges in Working with Involuntary Clients

Social work with involuntary clients is fundamentally complex. De Jong and Berg (2001) highlight that these relationships emerge from broader political and professional ideologies that define some individuals as needing surveillance or compulsory intervention. This places social workers in positions of power, compelled to enforce compliance while simultaneously attempting to build rapport.

Smith (2020) argues that traditional social work methods—such as active listening and client-led problem identification—are often insufficient in involuntary contexts. Instead, the work becomes more relational and adaptive, requiring practitioners to navigate hostility, denial, or mistrust. Engagement is less a linear process and more an art of improvisation, where workers respond to cues and shifting circumstances while prioritising relationship-building.

Key challenges include:

  • Resistance and reluctance: clients may refuse to engage, deny problems, or comply superficially.
  • Mistrust: many clients have negative past experiences with authority or institutions, making them sceptical of workers’ intentions.
  • Conflicting agendas: clients may prioritise different outcomes/ goals from those mandated by law or agency policy.
  • Time pressure: bureaucratic demands may conflict with the time required to build authentic relationships.

These challenges demand innovative, flexible, and ethically sensitive approaches.

The Engagement Process

Engagement is the foundation for effective work with involuntary clients. Jacobsen (2013) identifies four dimensions of engagement:

  1. Receptivity – the client’s openness to recognising problems and accepting help.
  2. Expectancy – belief in the possibility of benefit from intervention.
  3. Investment – willingness to take responsibility for their role in the enagement/ treatment.
  4. Working relationship – mutual trust, fairness, and open communication between worker and client.

Resistance, reluctance, and mistrust often undermine engagement. However, Jacobsen argues that motivation can be enhanced by support networks and by workers adopting a person-centred approach. Similarly, Smith (2020) emphasises recognition—treating clients with humanity and respect—as the starting point for engagement. Trust, built gradually, is fundamental to overcoming initial barriers. Workers may need to set aside their rigid timetables, acknowledge mistakes, and demonstrate authenticity to establish credibility.

For example, in child protection, a parent accused of neglect may initially view the social worker as a concern. However, consistent honesty, empathy, and transparency—such as acknowledging the parent’s fears while explaining the legal requirements—can slowly shift the relationship from hostility to provisional collaboration.

Practice Approaches

Motivational Interviewing

Motivational interviewing (MI) provides a structured yet flexible approach to working with ambivalence. Based on the stages of change—precontemplation, contemplation, preparation, action, maintenance, and relapse—MI recognises that clients may not be ready for change at the outset (Jacobsen, 2013). For involuntary clients, MI techniques such as exploring discrepancies, affirming autonomy, and reinforcing small successes can increase engagement and commitment.

For instance, an offender mandated to attend anger management may initially deny having a problem. Through MI, the social worker might highlight inconsistencies between the client’s stated desire for stable relationships and their aggressive behaviours, encouraging self-reflection without imposing judgement.

Solution-Focused Approaches

De Jong and Berg (2001) propose a solution-focused model, treating clients as experts in their own lives. This involves asking clients what they believe the agency expects of them, affirming their strengths, and collaboratively identifying strategies. This approach can empower clients who feel stripped of control by external mandates, giving them agency within the constraints of the system.

Cognitive-Behavioural Techniques

Cognitive-behavioural strategies are increasingly used with involuntary clients, particularly in criminal justice. These involve identifying irrational or harmful thought patterns and promoting pro-social alternatives (Trotter, Rooney & Rooney, 2020). Workers can model desired behaviours, reinforce positive change, and respectfully challenge harmful thinking.

Trotter’s Four Principles

Trotter (2006) outlines four principles for effective practice:

  1. Role clarification – being transparent about the worker’s dual role as helper and authority figure, clarifying negotiable and non-negotiable aspects, and explaining confidentiality.
  2. Pro-social modelling and reinforcement – promoting and rewarding constructive behaviours while discouraging harmful ones.
  3. Problem-solving – collaboratively identifying, ranking, and addressing problems with achievable goals and regular review.
  4. Relationship – maintaining empathy, optimism, honesty, and appropriate humour to foster trust.

These principles emphasise the balance between authority and empathy, accountability and support.

Good Practice Strategies

The Good Practice Guide developed in Scotland (Wilkinson, Smith & Gallaher, 2010) offers practical strategies for engaging involuntary clients, many of which remain highly relevant:

  • Building relationships: show humanity by sharing common interests or going the extra mile.
  • Trust-building: be consistent, keep promises, apologise when necessary.
  • Persistence and patience: recognise that progress is slow and requires flexibility.
  • Clear communication: explain roles, expectations, and consequences transparently.
  • Managing emotions: acknowledge hostility without personalising it; understand clients’ emotional histories.
  • Support for workers: avoid burnout by seeking peer support and resisting bureaucratic box-ticking.

These strategies highlight that effective practice is not only about methods but also about the personal qualities and resilience of the social worker.

Ethical Considerations

Working with involuntary clients raises profound ethical questions.

  • Power and authority: The worker’s statutory authority can create fear, mistrust, and resistance. Ethical practice requires transparency about power and efforts to minimise coercion where possible.
  • Autonomy vs protection: Clients may resist interventions designed to protect themselves or others. Social workers must navigate the tension between respecting autonomy and fulfilling legal duties.
  • Respect and dignity: Regardless of their circumstances, involuntary clients deserve recognition of their humanity (Smith, 2020). Small acts of respect—listening, apologising, validating experiences—can counteract the dehumanisation often felt by these clients.
  • Cultural sensitivity: Involuntary clients may come from marginalised communities disproportionately subject to surveillance and intervention. Workers must be mindful of systemic inequalities and avoid reinforcing oppression.

For example, a young person from a minority ethnic background in the youth justice system may view intervention as yet another example of systemic bias. The social worker must acknowledge these perceptions and aim to build trust while fulfilling statutory responsibilities.

Application to Practice

Child Protection

Parents investigated for neglect often experience shame, anger, and fear. They may resist workers’ involvement, perceiving them as threats to family unity. Building trust requires clear communication about the purpose of intervention, acknowledgment of parents’ strengths, and practical support—such as advocacy for housing or financial aid—alongside risk assessment.

Criminal Justice

Offenders on probation often demonstrate resistance, minimisation, or hostility. Using Trotter’s principles, workers can clarify roles, reinforce pro-social behaviours (e.g., punctuality, honesty), and use collaborative problem-solving to address criminogenic needs. Humour, empathy, and respectful challenge can help shift clients from compliance to genuine engagement.

Mental Health

Clients subject to compulsory treatment orders may mistrust professionals due to past (negative) experiences. Engagement requires recognising clients’ perspectives, involving them in care planning where possible, and validating their autonomy within legal constraints. Patience and consistency are crucial, as mistrust may take time to overcome.

In each context, the social worker must balance legal authority with relational ethics, adapting approaches to each individual circumstances.

Conclusion

Working with involuntary clients is among the most challenging yet essential aspects of social work practice. These clients often engage reluctantly, under compulsion or pressure, and bring with them mistrust, resistance, and conflicting agendas. However, effective practice is possible when social workers adopt approaches that combine clarity of role, respect for autonomy, pro-social modelling, and collaborative problem-solving.

Theories such as motivational interviewing and solution-focused practice provide useful frameworks, while Trotter’s principles and the Good Practice Guide offer practical strategies. Above all, successful engagement depends on relationships characterised by recognition, trust, and respect.

The ethical dilemmas of authority, autonomy, and systemic inequality require constant reflection. Social workers must strive to balance their statutory duties with their professional commitment to empowerment and justice. While progress may be slow and messy, the potential for positive change remains significant.

Ultimately, the work with involuntary clients exemplifies the dual nature of social work: at once constrained by law and bureaucracy, yet grounded in human connection, empathy, and the belief in people’s capacity for change.